- This topic is empty.
3 x Carrie Jay nsfw
-
Here are 3 portraits for review.
The first one has pretty standard processing, levels curves and a touch of noise ninja.
Radiant II
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/43337433/
2nd one seems to have some hot areas though the colour version doesnt so that was probably more to the processing than anything else:
Classic Pose Bw
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/43385042/
The third one is very heavily processed and is probably closer to a digital art piece than a photograph (due to the amount of things done to it – dont even ask!). Not really interested in critique of the third one in terms of the processing – you will either like the look or you wont – its more for the composition and impact (if any). I know this third one is a bit overboard to begin with.
Vanishing Point
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/43392114/
Thanks for checking – there are also alternate versions on the devart site if anyone wants to see them.
Hi Gerard
The third is indeed very strong like something from a film noir! :wink: Love its mood and the angle. I’m afraid the other two dont appeal that much to me,not really a big fan of that scene(Lingerie&Lace) albeit youre skills with the technical side are very impressive. Love the selective dodging in the second.
Curious is that Brandymans studio?
Ben :DThe best comment I can give is that number 2 is incredibly sexy :)
When I look through the lens, or shoot models the last thing I think about is the model. But I love it if I look at a shot afterwards and think “phwaor”. Number 2 is phwaor :!: For my likings 3 is over cooked in PS and number 1 whilst a good shot is put in the shade by 2.
Ben they were taken in randalstown in antrim (Carrie-Jay and Roy McKeown’s studio http://www.imagerystudio.co.uk/). I know what you mean Ciaran – at the time its always concentrating on framing, lighting and yadda ya – its only later you go – whoa there! PS that pose in the 2nd one was one carrie came up with. Thanks for checking.
photos look great – I know it might be hard for some to notice ;) but she has a great face :D
Just a question – why not the people sction ??? why was this moved ??
Lorraine
gerardk wrote:
Ben they were taken in randalstown in antrim (Carrie-Jay and Roy McKeown’s studio http://www.imagerystudio.co.uk/). I know what you mean Ciaran – at the time its always concentrating on framing, lighting and yadda ya – its only later you go – whoa there! PS that pose in the 2nd one was one carrie came up with. Thanks for checking.
Roy Smyth is going to be very upset with you ;)
or maybe flattered considering the quality of Roy McKeown’s work
Jack_Ryan wrote:
gerardk wrote:
Ben they were taken in randalstown in antrim (Carrie-Jay and Roy McKeown’s studio http://www.imagerystudio.co.uk/). I know what you mean Ciaran – at the time its always concentrating on framing, lighting and yadda ya – its only later you go – whoa there! PS that pose in the 2nd one was one carrie came up with. Thanks for checking.
Roy Smyth is going to be very upset with you ;)
or maybe flattered considering the quality of Roy McKeown’s work
Dammit dammit dammit – I always get those names crossed over.
I had indeed noticed she does have a great face very photogenic model alright.
Re the pictures being moved thanks for pointing that out Lorraine – why were these photographs moved from People to Everything else ?
They are photographs of a person – with very little else contained therein – surely that is the perfect fit for a ‘People’ section ?
Also as there is a nipple count of zero in these pictures it cant be for the subject matter can it ?
Can I ask out of idle curiosity who moved them and why ? Pretty sure other pics of mine have been moved before and I still dont get the reasoning behind this seemingly random policy. Perhaps if you put out guidelines for what photographs qualify for which category people wont put pics in the wrong places – but in all honesty I fail to see how these dont belong in the PEOPLE category – certainly I dont see how they belong more in the EVERYTHING ELSE category above the PEOPLE one.
Thanks again for checking.
I didn’t move it, but I’m guessing it was moved because the first shot is a portrait and the other two are more glamour, not portraits. The people section is for portraits and candids only. We don’t have a glamour section on this site.
I would be happy to split the post for you Gerard, leave the glamour here and then move the first image back to portraits.
SteveD wrote:
I didn’t move it, but I’m guessing it was moved because the first shot is a portrait and the other two are more glamour, not portraits. The people section is for portraits and candids only. We don’t have a glamour section on this site.
I would be happy to split the post for you Gerard, leave the glamour here and then move the first image back to portraits.
Sorry to quote you Steve .. and thanks for attempting an explanation… it does strike me as more than a little bizarre though ! Similar images have been in the “people” section previously and I don’t remember there being any notice that they aren’t acceptable as people shots. Did I miss something !
Does it really make sense to put them in Everything Else ?
L
EDIT – Actually rather than hijack the thread – if there is a response can we start is somewhere else – sorry Gerard :oops:
No need for a separate thread.
I moved this last night and left a link to it in the People forum so it could still be found.
Moved as I see 2 of the 3 images as being glamour images, simple as that.
Same as if a landscape shot went into a documentary forum. Its a cleanup/tidy operation.Several images posted in People or Fashion have been moved in the past here and some inappropriate images (gerards images are fine) have been
removed from the site altogether.This isn’t about whether there is nipple showing etc, its about whether the images are People (portrait or candids) or something else.
Definitely one is a portrait and can/should be split and moved back as Steve suggests. The other two are glamour photographs.If there are other posts in People which should be here, PM me with links. Its not always possible to check every post on the site.
This is about moving the post to the appropriate forum.
Mark
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
